Expansion Powerhouses

[VanillaGorilla]

In my random debut league, I forgot to click on league evolution, so in 2013 Houston did not move into the AL. I thought I had this clicked, but I didn't. I engaged league evolution prior to the 2018 season, and I wondered if Houston would move for 2019.

The answer was "No."

However, I did get 2 AL expansion teams so now both leagues have divisions with 5/6/5 teams.

I am not controlling any team (this is for second HOF run through which is logged on the historical board). I can only guess as to what happened, but I think it is cool.

The teams came in with budgets of about $90M. Seeing this, lots of teams left lots of big money guys unprotected.

Seeing this, the expansion teams said "OK, we'll take them!"

Now both expansion teams are loaded for bear, and carrying the highest 2 payrolls in the league (nore then double the third highest). They are also looking at projected deficits for the season of close to $200M each.

Since they are both in the AL, they can't square off in the WS, but they are the odds on favorite to represent the AL.

Note the ages of the players in the following posts. These are not albatross contracts. These are HOFers, All Stars, MVPs in their primes.

[VanillaGorilla]

Dallas

[VanillaGorilla]

Jax,,,oops....messed up the up load....next post

[VanillaGorilla]

Jacksonville Tribunes

[VanillaGorilla]

Good freaking Lord! These are expansion teams!

Well, it will be interesting to see how much these owners kick in. The expansion has certainly freed up money for the other clubs, also.

Anyway, these rosters are amazing...and they are expansions...

[VanillaGorilla]

Dallas plays in a slightly hitting friendly park. The pitching numbers are particularly noteworthy, because of that.

[VanillaGorilla]

Jacksonville plays in a park that strongly favors pitching and minimizes HRs. These offensive numbers are incredible.

[Dutch Alexander]

48 HR and 112 RBI!!!????????At the Allstar Break!!!!!!!???????????
Good lord, good 'ol Gavvy's going crazy! Does he have acne on his back?

[VanillaGorilla]

Dallas at the end of season. Note 4 20 game winners. Something that has never happened in a RL 5-man rotation environment. In 1971, the Orioles were the last team to have 4 20 game winners. In that season, only 16 games were not started by their big four (Cuellar, Dobson, McNally, and Palmer).

For Dallas, 32 starts were taken by players that didn't win 20.

[VanillaGorilla]

Originally Posted by Dutch Alexander

48 HR and 112 RBI!!!????????At the Allstar Break!!!!!!!???????????
Good lord, good 'ol Gavvy's going crazy! Does he have acne on his back?

All rumors of gambling, bat corking, throwing (post season) games, and bacne are willfully ignored by the Commissioner (me). I aim for realism.

[VanillaGorilla]

Jacksonville clinched the division on Labor Day. Dallas 2 days later. Prior to Play off revenues (which will make nary a dent in the outcomes) Jax has a $155M shortfall and Dallas a $137M shortfall.

[VanillaGorilla]

Play-offs are over....both Jax and Dallas swept their first rd match-ups. Jax took a 2-0 lead in the ALCS, but Dallas won 4-2. Dallas then swept Houston in the WS.

This is my first time dealing with expansion in the game, so maybe this massive taking on of salary is nothing uncommon by expansion teams. I got a smile out of it, and I am interested to see how these teams carry on.

Bringing in 2 owners that are willing to spend like Steinbrenner (and actually spend wisely), when there is no such owner in the league's universe, literally makes for a whole new ball game.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by VanillaGorilla

This is my first time dealing with expansion in the game, so maybe this massive taking on of salary is nothing uncommon by expansion teams.

For what it's worth, here's how the last four real-life expansion teams fared in terms of opening day payroll in their inaugural season as compared to the major league average opening day payroll in that same year.

Major League average (1993): $30,603,088
Colorado Rockies (1993): $8,854,000 (28.9%)
Florida Marlins (1993): $18,297,546 (59.8%)

Major League average (1998): $40,359,381
Arizona Diamondbacks (1998): $30,571,500 (75.7%)
Tampa Bay Devil Rays (1998): $25,317,500 (62.7%)

[VanillaGorilla]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

For what it's worth, here's how the last four real-life expansion teams fared in terms of opening day payroll in their inaugural season as compared to the major league average opening day payroll in that same year.

Major League average (1993): $30,603,088
Colorado Rockies (1993): $8,854,000 (28.9%)
Florida Marlins (1993): $18,297,546 (59.8%)

Major League average (1998): $40,359,381
Arizona Diamondbacks (1998): $30,571,500 (75.7%)
Tampa Bay Devil Rays (1998): $25,317,500 (62.7%)

Thanks for the data. I didn't know the precise numbers, but I knew that RL expansion teams have never taken the type of plunge that Dallas and Jacksonville did in my league.

Again, I don't know if this type of expansion team spending in OOTP is an aberration or somewhat common. This is my first experience with it. Going into the 2019 season, as the two expansion teams were close to $300 M, each, in payroll, there was only one other team with a payroll over $100 M.

Both team's owners have kicked in money to cover the shortfalls and given each the opportunity to sign some (not all, Cravath has gone elsewhere) players to extensions and to sign some Free Agents.

Oh, and Dallas and Jacksonville got the first two picks in the 2019 Amateur Draft. Holy moly.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by VanillaGorilla

Oh, and Dallas and Jacksonville got the first two picks in the 2019 Amateur Draft. Holy moly.

Wait a minute. The two expansion teams where the top two picks in the amateur draft in their inaugural season? If so, that's a mistake that was supposed to have been fixed. Expansion teams should always get the last picks in the amateur draft in their inaugural season. (That's how it works in real life.)

[VanillaGorilla]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

Wait a minute. The two expansion teams where the top two picks in the amateur draft in their inaugural season? If so, that's a mistake that was supposed to have been fixed. Expansion teams should always get the last picks in the amateur draft in their inaugural season. (That's how it works in real life.)

To be clear on the semantics...in the draft following their first season of play, they had the 1-2 picks. They had the 1 and 3 picks in the draft prior to their first season (the team with the first overall pick in 2017 did not sign that draftee and drafted the second player in 2018).

League evolution caused the expansion, not me. As I said, I have no experience with this. I do not know if the expansion rules vary, as others do, when using league evolution, or if this is, as you say, an item that was meant to be corrected.

For the 1998 historical expansion of AZ and TB, these teams drafted 1 and 2 prior to their initial season. They had the two worst records in baseball in 1998 and drafted according to their records following that season.

In this 2019 season, the expansion teams had the two best records, but still drafted 1-2 following the season(except for the compensation pick given for the previous unsigned top pick).

[VanillaGorilla]

Dallas and Jacksonville trimmed some pay roll, and neither won 120+ games, but tey both handilly won their divisions. Jax got bounced in the ALDS and Dallas went on to win its second WS in two years of existence.

I didn't snip the Dallas page prior to the Amateur Draft and Free Agent declaration, so the default line-up does not apply with what they finished the 2020 season. That is why it is not included. Dick Allen was the player Dallas took with the second overall pick in the previous draft.

[David Watts]

Vanilla, I would love to get your opinion on something as you seem to be the person getting the most use out of random debut. Do you think the drafts following the initial draft are too stacked when using the random feature? I thought I would love random debut, but so far I haven't been able to get into it. For me, it always seems like teams develop into all star teams way too fast. Even with drafts being only 4 or 5 rounds it seems like teams end up with too many studs and not enough Tom Veryzers.

[VanillaGorilla]

Originally Posted by David Watts

Vanilla, I would love to get your opinion on something as you seem to be the person getting the most use out of random debut. Do you think the drafts following the initial draft are too stacked when using the random feature? I thought I would love random debut, but so far I haven't been able to get into it. For me, it always seems like teams develop into all star teams way too fast. Even with drafts being only 4 or 5 rounds it seems like teams end up with too many studs and not enough Tom Veryzers.

Short answer is "No."

Clarifying my answer -

I use recalc (have used 1, 3, and 5 years...any length qualifies for my opinion, here) and player dev (along with aging) at the default. I absolutely love how these game dynamics integrate with the historical players in a historical environment, random debut certainly included. I use ghost players for AAA affiliates, and have fictional players blocked from reaching the Majors (should, through some quirk, they be added to the pool, somehow).

I use the word "genius" in describing the structure of this game because, imo, it is absolutely that.

With a league being played in Major League environment (and when you use random debut, you are only getting Major League players), the game structure gives you aggregate results based on whatever year you choose to use (or fictional year you choose to construct).

There are only so many All-Star slots to be had in a given year. So, by definition, you cannot have teams stocked with All-Stars, across the board. Even if your initial draft produced nothing but RL HOF pitchers and nothing but RL Tom Veryzers and Duane Kuipers and Buddy Biancalanas, after you run through that season, if it is in a 2012 environment (just to pick one), your league will have an aggregate slash line close to 255/319/405 and your Veryzers, Kuipers and Biancalanas will have hit about 5000 HRs total.

With this as the game construct, it is impossible to get "too many" All-Stars or not enough Veryzers. They will be there. Their ratings may not look like it, but when the game executes, the output will represent MLB in your chosen environment.

What WILL happen in the early years of the league is that the good players will put up extraordinary...historically Earth shattering seasons, because there is a limited talent pool to dip into when attrition due to injury or age causes the good players to be that much better than everyone else.

We see this when starting a league in 1871, or thereabouts, and we get pitching records that are never challenged. We don't see hitting records set in this fashion in an 1870s environment because of the era modifiers. For me, these pitching performances were disguised by the era adjustments as being simply due to the era adjustments. I see this with pitchers no matter what year I start my leagues. This is because there are fewer pitchers on rosters, so it is more likely to have pitchers with talent Z scores well above those of hitters (meaning, it is easier for a pitcher to be twice, or three times as good than the average pitcher than it is for a hitter to be twice or three times as good as the average hitter).

I grew up on Strat. Once I got a handle on the fact that this game is not bsed on Strat-type cards (you couldn't have a fair game if you threw Walter Johnson's card in with a bunch of players from the 80s) and that it is based on relative strength (a 20 fielder on a 20 scale in a league stocked with 20 fielders is not necessarily going to be better than the 15 fielder playing the game in the same season but in a universe where the average fielder at his position is a 6).

I have found that any short-term anomalies play themselves out.

I think I have received the best career results (most "realistic") on the aggregate when I use High injuries....what do you know.....that is what the guy that programmed the game suggests to use for realism.....

As I do my random debut leagues, I love seeing names I am familiar with. Even if the player was really only an above average player for one or two seasons in RL, I remember him for those good seasons...maybe when he did make an AS appearance, so I have experienced the phenomena of "seeing" teams stocked with All-Stars, but in reality, these players weren't perennial All-Stars, but a glance at a roster that has Jody Davis on it makes me cheer because I love Jody Davis. But the reality is, he only had one year, in RL, with an OPS+ over 100. He won only one GG, but I think of him as always being a fine defensive catcher, even though he wasn't at the start of his career, and was never elite, but I cheered for him and loved him back in the day, and I still do now. He played in 2 AS games, but I think of him as ALWAYS being an AS....that is, until I look at his record with a dispassionate eye.

I think this a bit of what you describe when you say there are too many All Stars and not enough Veryzers. We recognize the guys that did have AS seasons, or were quality role players, from whatever team. We recognize the name of Tom Veryzer because he happened to play on the team we followed, but the names of all the other guys that hung around collecting 50 hits a year as a back up player, we don't. So, I think we "see" the notable names and don't really take into account all of the Veryzer types that are in the pools, when we take a casual glance.

I have been tracking RL HOFers as they enter my leagues, and they enter randomly. Sometimes I get a clump of them in a pool, sometimes I go 3 years without getting a single one. But they don't all come in early in a universe, by any stretch of the imagination.

I will stop here, as I have strayed off your original question, but I hope I have managed to tie my thoughts to your question.

I will attempt to be more succinct with any follow-up.

Bottom lines, here: Default dev/ageing, High injury setting, recalc of any length, no fictional players, ghosts in AAA, 5 rds per team per year of new talent, and give the game a chance to work out seeming abnormalities over the course of some seasons.

[David Watts]

Wow, thanks for taking the time to do that. I may have to give this feature more of my time.